Pauline Hanson corrects her immigration arithmetic

Pauline Hanson’s revised immigration maths may finally work, but the economic consequences of her policy will be devastating, writes Dr Abul Rizvi.

ACCORDINGLY noticing (a new far-right media outlet trying to compete with Sky After Dark), Senator Pauline Hanson He revised the arithmetic of immigration policy. He may now be comparing like with like, and that’s a big positive in trying to understand his politics. So what will the new policy include?

Previous policy (still in effect) current website As of March 6) it was:

‘Reduce immigration by more than 570,000 people from current Labor levels by capping visas at 130,000 per year to ease pressure on housing, wages and infrastructure.’

It now appears that the 570,000 figure is a reference to net migration arrivals in 2024-25. This number was around 568,000 (less departures of around 263,000, giving a preliminary estimate of 306,000 net migration).

The previous reference to 130,000 visas was also unclear. If permanent visas are referenced, this will not reduce net migration to zero, the Chief of Staff has previously said. If visas were everything, this would effectively be the end of international movement of people across Australia’s borders, as we issue around eight million visas a year.

But as Hanson said, that doesn’t matter anymore noticing his new policy is this:

‘…under One Nation immigrant arrivals will be limited to 130,000 per year, resulting in net overseas migration of -100,000.’

Presumably “immigrant arrivals” refers to net migration arrivals. This means One Nation is finally talking arithmetic sense, even if it has no idea how the number of net immigration could be limited to 130,000.

Limiting net immigration entries is not the same as limiting visas. A visa is an authorization document that allows entry to Australia for a certain period of time. There are powers inside you Immigration Law This allows the Government to impose restrictions on most visa categories (but not by nationality as One Nation wants to do).

No Immigration Law has the authority to limit net migration inflows. The blocking of almost all international movement during COVID has been made possible by the emergency public health powers that the Minister of Health has. In Australia these cannot be triggered by a Trumpist or Hansonian whim.

Net migration arrivals are people who arrive in Australia and remain outside Australia for more than 12 months of the 16 months who subsequently remain there for at least 12 months of the 16 months (regardless of their visa category or citizenship, thus including Australian citizens). When a person arrives, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABSs) (and hence the Ministry of Human Affairs) can only predict whether they will become a net inflow of overseas migration. There is no way to know for sure how long a person will stay in Australia.

Even if a law were passed to limit net migration arrivals, it would be impossible to enforce because at the time of arrival, we cannot determine whether a person is a net migration arrival or a non-net migration arrival. If we tried to do this at airports, the situation would become even more chaotic than it is now.

But let’s assume that a method could be found to limit net migration inflows overall to around 130,000 per year (most likely through radical changes to visa design and ceiling). What net migration arrival categories will Hanson target?

Net migration inflows in 2024-25 are as follows:

Students: 156,660.
Temporarily skilled: 45,780.
Visitors: 56,080.
Working on holiday: 78,340.
Other provisional: 26,170.
Permanent family: 24,390.
Permanent skill: 40,410.
Special eligibility and humanitarian assistance: 14,870.
Other permanent: 8,540.
New Zealand citizens: 53,020.
Australian citizens: 64,060.
Total: 568,400.

Presumably, a Hanson government would not impose restrictions on the return of Australian citizens (which would be illegal despite the ongoing law). ISIS brides) or the arrival of New Zealand citizens (a difficult negotiation with New Zealand) or the return of existing permanent residents (legally very difficult).

In addition, existing law prohibits the Government from restricting visas for partners and dependent children of Australian citizens and permanent residents. Taking these groups into account, net migration arrivals would be well over 130,000 according to Hanson’s 2024-25 data.

Visas for the rest will have to be abolished or severely shortened.

This would mean the end of Australia’s international education sector, with 10,000s of university and private college staff laid off. This will not only apply to metropolitan Australia, but will also affect universities in the Australian region.

Universities will no longer be able to cross-subsidize domestic students or their research activities from tuition fees paid by overseas students. Many small and large businesses around universities that rely on overseas students will face bankruptcy.

The tourism and agricultural industries will largely lose access to working holidaymaker visa holders. These industries rely heavily on this labour, as not enough Australians want to do this work. Many businesses in these sectors will be forced to close or downsize, leading to more Australians being laid off.

Australian employers will not be able to access skilled workers from abroad. This includes a large number of health and aged care staff recruited from overseas, including from health and aged care operators in the Australian region. Hospital and aged care waiting lists will grow further due to staffing shortages, particularly in regional Australia.

In fact, the Australian region may be hardest hit by Hanson’s attempt to reduce net migration by 100,000.

None of this could bother Hanson. But Australians must remember that we have never experienced negative 100,000 net migration before. Even during the height of COVID, net migration did not drop this much. didn’t fall this far during Great DepressionAlthough the lowest levels of net migration have always been during recessions with very high unemployment.

Recession would be the only option for a Hanson government to reduce net migration to minus 100,000. both Canada and New Zealand We have managed to keep net migration close to zero, partly because a very sharp rise in unemployment has increased departures.

Would a Hanson government try to create recession and higher unemployment to achieve its net migration target? It could stagnate without even trying!

Doctor Abul Rizvi He is an independent Australian columnist and a former Deputy Secretary of the Immigration Service. You can follow Abul on Twitter @RizviAbul or Bluesky @abulrizvi.bsky.social.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.